Meeting Minutes for May 9th 2010

--===============0905094653==
Content-Type: text/plain


[21:02:40]<chris> ##### Meeting Begins #####
[21:03:27]<chris> Agenda as follows
[21:04:18]<chris> 1) 2.1.0 progress report
[21:05:04]<chris> 2) Infrastucture update (chad?)
[21:05:08]<chris> 3) Open floor
[21:05:09]*** Tim1980 has joined #pmc
[21:05:28]<Tim1980> Sorry I am late and been absent last two weeks life 
happens.
[21:05:58]<chris> With regards to 1) I'd like to say thanks to Random for 
getting 2.1.0 rc1 out today :)
[21:06:05]<random> np
[21:07:11]<random> anything more?
[21:07:16]<chris> beyond that, I'm guessing there's not much to report that 
we don't already know
[21:07:38]<random> well I expect there will be the odd bug
[21:07:54]<random> and especially the upgrader might still turn up issues
[21:08:16]<random> but I don't see a lot of surprises from this release
[21:08:26]<random> and I expect the final could go out soon
[21:08:34]<random> so perhaps one could time it
[21:08:46]<random> as you see fit
[21:09:37]<Tim1980> Congrats on 2.1.0 RC1
[21:10:56]<random> thx
[21:11:05]<random> my goal is to get back to basics
[21:11:12]<random> release early and often
[21:11:17]<random> well often at least
[21:11:37]<chris> sure, keep us apprised of the anticipated ETA, in the 
meantime we can get to work on the announcement for it
[21:12:00]<chris> 1.2.1 is still scheduled for next Sunday too
[21:12:36]<random> what I'm saying is the ETA can be moved according to 
things like the announcement or other marketing considerations
[21:12:46]<chris> aha, cool
[21:12:54]<Tim1980> Speaking of timing I have been mulling over my thoughts 
about the site reorg (this kind of relates to 2.1.0 but if it needs to be 
help to oppen floor so be it) Why not relaunch Xaraya.com on 2.1.0? As 
exciting as 1.2.0 was/is. I think the project should embrace 2.1.0 and use 
it has its own web plateform.
[21:14:31]<Tim1980> ANyway I know thats somewhat off topic sorry for that.
[21:15:37]<Robert> No need to be sorry Tim, open discussion leads where it 
leads :)
[21:17:21]<Tim1980> I know time is an issue and I have been playing (yes 
playing I am no developer) and Jamaica is a superior tool to 1.2.0. While 
the Ajax features are great, other simplifications and improvements in 
Jamaica make it a better choice for future development. With that in mind, 
why not use Xaraya.com as a great marketing tool for the basic things 
Jamaica can do.
[21:18:15]<chris> That possibility has been discussed Tim, at this point 
though, perhaps better left for discussion at a later date, when we have a 
clearer plan to present.
[21:19:07]<Tim1980> Since you have to reorganize everything anyway, why not 
start over and do it 201cright201d from the get go. By right I mean start 
small and be scalable. Flexibility is very important for a project of this 
type and its current scope.
[21:19:17]<Tim1980> Okay, thanks Chris I will shut up :-P
[21:19:20]<chris> Valid points though in so far as why we might want to head 
in that direction :)
[21:19:56]<Robert> All I will say is +1 to the idea ;)
[21:20:20]<random> +1
[21:20:29]<random> obviously I guess
[21:20:56]<random> for the record Jamaica will also get ajax support in the 
future
[21:21:05]<Robert> The head developer thinks we should use his baby for 
Xaraya.com who would have guessed :P
[21:21:08]<random> still in the design püase
[21:21:17]<random> phase
[21:21:26]<Tim1980> Glad its being thought out (ajax that is)
[21:21:29]<random> yea robert it is surprising
[21:21:45]<random> cause it would likely drag me into the relaunch :)
[21:21:50]<chris> heh
[21:21:59]<random> to a degree anyway
[21:23:18]<Tim1980> Don't get me wrong I love Aruba and it has lots of life 
left and should be support for the foreseeable future (18-24 months) but 
JAmaica is where all the develop will go from theis point forware (mainly 
anyway) so the project should use it. Maybe I don't shut up well haha
[21:24:52]<Tim1980> Does anyone have any current contacts to 
administrators/managers/owners of development/site administration 
blogs/websites/communities? Thought I would ask while we are on a redirect 
of 2.1.0 :P
[21:25:11]<Tim1980> Feel free to wait to anwser at the open floor time, just 
had to ask before I forgot.
[21:25:19]<random> heh
[21:26:52]<chris> ok, back on topic, anyone got anything to add before we 
move on from 2.1.0 progress?
[21:27:31]<random> I have nothing more
[21:27:36]<random> can take questions though
[21:28:19]<Tim1980> How many RC's do you see being needed?
[21:28:38]<random> 1
[21:28:48]<Tim1980> Always good ;)
[21:28:54]<random> what that means
[21:29:15]<random> a new RC is needed when something major changes
[21:29:47]<Tim1980> While modules aren't the projects scope (at this time) 
are any going to be working with 2.1.0 at or near release.
[21:29:55]<chris> all of em
[21:30:15]<Tim1980> Okay thank you Chris.
[21:30:31]<Tim1980> All the questions I have at the moment
[21:30:32]<random> there are like 20 odd modules that run on Jamaica
[21:30:53]<random> they may have some holes though
[21:30:59]<random> need to be tested
[21:31:00]<chris> I'm still working my way through them, but most of em are 
working, with just the odd tweak needed here and there
[21:31:07]<random> question of resources
[21:31:56]<Tim1980> Chris: If your going through them, let me know what ones 
need to be tested before 2.1.0
[21:32:03]<chris> testing and bug reports would certainly be useful
[21:32:59]<chris> Ideally, test them all, there's always a chance things 
will get missed
[21:35:21]<Tim1980> Okay I will set some time up this week to do testing 
then, I most likely will not be able to provide patches (only can hack at 
php) but I can report issues.
[21:35:41]<chris> reporting them is good enough
[21:35:52]<random> the most interesting might be those around community web 
sites
[21:36:16]<random> articles,categories,authentication, registration and the 
like
[21:36:22]<random> and xarpages
[21:36:49]<random> cause that's where Xaraya came from
[21:36:51]<chris> yeah, I'd go along with that
[21:37:08]<random> think xarbb is there too iirc
[21:37:14]<chris> ouch!
[21:37:15]<random> I forget
[21:37:24]<chris> you hurt with those words ya know :-o
[21:37:31]<random> heh
[21:37:50]<random> crispnn is there too iirc
[21:37:54]<chris> crispbb is there, xarbb isn't
[21:37:57]<random> crispbb
[21:38:02]<random> ah really?
[21:38:05]<random> mybad
[21:38:08]<Tim1980> I personally use crispBB, as a forum its much more 
robust then xarbb
[21:38:37]<Tim1980> I think xarbb is there but its for "unstable" and not 
the current 2.1.0 branch :-P
[21:38:43]<chris> I don't see the point of porting xarbb
[21:38:51]<chris> also means porting messages too
[21:39:00]<random> comments you mean
[21:39:08]<chris> er, yeah that
[21:39:10]<chris> lol
[21:39:42]<random> no big deal anyway
[21:39:42]<Tim1980> I use crispBB for "comments" on content Anyway off topic 
again.
[21:40:39]<chris> I ported the scheduler module earlier too
[21:41:29]<Tim1980> I have never used that module, is it to schedule tasks 
within Xaraya, or something users use to make a schedule?
[21:41:41]<chris> schedule task in xaraya
[21:41:41]<Tim1980> Meh forget that question this isn't the place.
[21:41:46]<random> former
[21:41:51]<Tim1980> Thanks :)
[21:41:58]<Tim1980> Sorry I am bad about taking people off topic
[21:42:07]<chris> different modules provide their own functions, and the 
scheduler 'schedules' them for execution :)
[21:42:25]<Tim1980> Sounds useful
[21:42:38]<Tim1980> so kind of like corn jobs
[21:42:55]<Robert> corn? lol
[21:43:18]<random> it runs off cron in linux
[21:43:20]<chris> kinda, although you need to set up a cron (or some other 
trigger) to get the scheduler to run
[21:43:22]<random> orcan
[21:43:36]<Tim1980> No one said I could type :P
[21:44:30]<random> cron runs a script in scheduler that in turn triggers the 
functions to run
[21:49:45]<chris> ok, 2.1.0 covered? move on?
[21:49:54]<random> k
[21:50:29]<Robert> Move on :)
[21:50:34]<Tim1980> Sounds good to me
[21:50:38]<chris> ok, topic 2, infrastructure will be short and sweet, since 
I know chad has nothing to report at the moment
[21:51:03]<chris> in essence, we're still actively pursuing hosting options
[21:51:22]<chris> there's not much more to be said at this point
[21:51:32]<Tim1980> Fair enough
[21:53:12]<Robert> No questions from me on this from me.
[21:53:17]<chris> anyone anything to add on this topic?
[21:53:54]<random> nope
[21:53:55]<Tim1980> Not I
[21:54:11]<chris> ok, moving on then :)
[21:54:43]<chris> Open floor
[21:56:16]<Tim1980> With modules like registration & categories not in core, 
but needed in 201cmost201d environments does the project ever plan on 
taking a more realistic stance on modules? What I mean is, clearly some are 
first party modules (developed mostly by the team and supported though 
unofficially by the team) and third party modules. With a new stance, core 
could become even more refined while the project could stiff have first 
party modules to deliver
[21:58:05]<Robert> most*
[21:58:32]<random> lost me a bit there
[21:58:38]<chris> me too
[21:58:48]<Robert> Least I think thats what is supposed to be after the word 
in
[22:00:39]<Tim1980> Unofficially the project seems to always had first party 
modules (registration is the main one I can think of.) It isn;t a core 
module though so witht he offical stance that the project is core only could 
be confusing to new comers. They might worry the registration module will 
not be kept working with new releaes.
[22:01:58]<chris> ok, so non-core modules maintained by the project are what 
you'd consider to be 'first party'?
[22:02:24]<Tim1980> Yes, maybe not all modules, but some yes.
[22:03:13]<chris> and you'd like the project to declare that that's the case 
to avoid confusion to users?
[22:03:43]<chris> (this is just so I understand the aim)
[22:03:50]<Tim1980> Yes
[22:03:55]<Tim1980> Think about it registration for example used to be a 
part of roles then was taken out, the module has been maintained and ported 
from Aruba to Jamaica. At least that one module would or should be rather 
considered first party.
[22:04:11]<Tim1980> Also with the current stance it would be hard to say 
take profiles out of roles and make it into a module
[22:04:33]<random> profiles?
[22:05:44]<Tim1980> Clarifying the projects stance doesn2019t prevent Jim 
from developing a module called Registration Plus with extra features he 
didn2019t think should be in the main registration module. It just means 
the registration module will be maintained. Heck it doesn2019t even mean 
only core developers can update and change it.
[22:06:28]<Tim1980> Well to simplify roles, it might be decided in the 
future that roles should only handle the bare basics and let another module 
handle profiles. It was just an example.
[22:06:39]<random> yea
[22:07:12]<random> the reason for that is that that part of roles sort of 
sux :)
[22:07:30]<random> as does registrationimho
[22:07:42]<Tim1980> Either way I am just saying it2019s really never been 
true that the projects scope is just core, and I just think it should be 
clarified.
[22:08:03]<Tim1980> I won't dissagree with you random :)
[22:08:31]<random> I would suggest that the project react rather than be 
proactive here
[22:08:35]<random> just my opinion
[22:09:21]<chris> ok, as far as I can see, registration is the only module 
one might consider 'first party'
[22:09:21]<Tim1980> Or heck even look at Robert's FR, some of those new 
eatures shouldn't be in core. Groups for example should be its own module 
and not in core, but the features could be important enough that the madule 
be first party and maintained by the project.
[22:09:49]<Tim1980> I would say categories wuld be in Jamaica concidering 
there are thoughts of adding it to core ;)
[22:11:37]<Tim1980> Not like taking a stance would change anything for the 
most part. Heck just do it quietly with the site relaunch, if you redo the 
release module or update it. You could have a Xaraya logo next to any 
modules in the extensions reprasentorry that signifies they are first party 
modules.
[22:12:03]<random> taking a stance does change things
[22:12:20]<random> because it assumes a responsibility
[22:12:22]<chris> I agree, I'm for the status quo at the moment
[22:12:28]<random> whetheror not there is a demand for it
[22:12:56]<random> I would prefer there be a groundswell of demand
[22:13:07]<random> and then the project take action
[22:13:54]<random> cause actually if you want to do things right you want to 
give them a bit more thought than just a blind port
[22:14:11]<random> that updates a module that sucks to continue sucking :)
[22:14:29]<chris> heh
[22:14:46]<random> take robert's FRs for example
[22:14:50]<Tim1980> Well if you don't want the responsibility maybe one 
should drop having any modules our side of core. The act of having 
registration and updating as already but that responsiblity there.
[22:14:59]<Tim1980> out*
[22:15:00]<random> there is a lot of interesting food for thought there
[22:15:33]<random> er no,didn't say that
[22:15:52]<Robert> Sorry for not replying sooner, I have been wanting to put 
as much thought in my reply as I did in the original post.
[22:16:09]<random> no worries
[22:17:43]<random> the modules thing is a question of target market really
[22:18:14]<random> if you're building say simple sties that are not 
community oriented
[22:18:29]<random> you hardly ever need either registration or roles 
profiles
[22:18:47]<random> on the other hand xarpages becomes important
[22:19:19]<random> or articles
[22:22:24]<Tim1980> Seems like a good reason to take say profiles out of 
core and have first party modules. I would guess first party modules would 
provide features to expedite development.
[22:22:51]<Tim1980> But features that may not need to be in core.
[22:23:07]<random> taking stuff out is easy
[22:23:15]<random> development is hard
[22:23:21]<random> or rather
[22:23:25]<random> design is hard
[22:25:01]<random> what exactly a profiles module should do is unclear to me
[22:26:29]<random> probably there should be a discussion about specific 
topics like this
[22:27:11]<chris> sounds like a discussion for #devel if we're discussing 
future features/modules
[22:27:12]<random> there needs to be an interested party that takes the lead 
in thinking about desing
[22:27:17]<random> yes
[22:27:46]<Tim1980> Anyway sorry I brought it up
[22:27:54]<random> why?
[22:28:39]<Tim1980> I have clearly offended people so I am appologizing for 
bringing up what I guess is a touchy subject.
[22:28:49]<chris> with regards to the adoption of non core modules, it's 
something to consider, but I agree with Marc that it would be better if we 
were reactive to that need
[22:28:52]<random> it is?
[22:29:18]<random> I don't find it at all touchy
[22:29:35]<chris> me neither :/
[22:29:44]<random> I'm not offended. I doubt anyone is
[22:30:02]* chris isn't
[22:30:17]<random> hmm
[22:30:20]<Tim1980> It just seems odd I make examples and instead of taking 
them for what they are we turn it into a development conversation. Which is 
fine but not the point I was making. Normally when people redirect a 
question it means they are offended
[22:30:22]<random> no,is
[22:30:35]<Robert> To lazy to be offended :P
[22:31:10]<chris> I brought the convo back on topic
[22:31:34]<random> I think you misunderstand about redirection here
[22:32:00]<random> I find it more easy to discuss the specific examples
[22:32:08]<random> than to stay at the level of general statements
[22:32:17]<Robert> Though in the simplest form Tim is right we already have 
one single first party module, saying we have one module changes nothing 
now. It may change things in the future. *shrugs*
[22:32:34]<random> inasmuch as I have thought a bit about the 2 examples 
mentioned
[22:32:46]<Robert> I did say I would be slow replying.
[22:33:30]<chris> the point random made was one of responsibility with 
refards to maintaining any such modules
[22:33:39]<chris> for me that's a key concern for the project right now
[22:34:10]<chris> resources are tight, we don't need to be burdened with 
more
[22:34:10]<Tim1980> Sorry for misunderstanding, I wasn2019t subjecting make 
a new module now and declare it first party. I was just saying in the future 
you will need to and in the past you already have registration, which is 
first party by all definition of the meaning besides being declared as such.
[22:34:51]<random> we can declare it "official"
[22:34:59]<random> I just don't see the benefit
[22:35:06]<Tim1980> You already take responsibility for the registration 
module so again that isn2019t really changing anything.
[22:35:55]<chris> do we though? it just happens to have been ported because 
it fills a need
[22:35:56]<random> I do see the (potential) added work
[22:36:16]<Tim1980> The benefit is developers know which modules if any they 
can count on when new releases come and which they can2019t. At this stage 
that2019s a single module outside of core. In the future when people are 
developing and helping more it could mean other modules.
[22:36:22]<chris> there's no developer with a responsibility for it afaik
[22:37:18]<random> but my point is: why registration and not xarpages?
[22:37:40]<Tim1980> Maybe think of it in another way. Could the projects own 
website function without the registration module? If the answer is no then 
there will always be a responsibility to maintain it.
[22:37:57]<random> heh
[22:38:12]<random> good save
[22:38:19]<Tim1980> Maybe xarpages should be a first party module, that 
would be up for the development leader to decide I would guess.
[22:39:29]<random> don't you think there is a strategic marketing component 
here?
[22:40:04]<Tim1980> If the project where to have first party modules I would 
think deciding which to include would come down to three things. Development 
recourses, project need, and fulfilling an application frameworks duty to 
expedite development.
[22:41:00]<random> project need -->strategic marketing I think
[22:42:02]<Tim1980> Marketing could come into play here too, having some 
first party modules (tools) ready for site/project developers means you can 
market your product to many different types of developers. It also gives you 
the flexibility to lean core down even more and still deliver features that 
developers/site admins/users have come to expect.
[22:42:55]<random> there needs to be more discussion here I think
[22:43:06]<random> for instance
[22:43:54]<random> I would argue the need for maintaining registration is 
less important than upgrading the framework's publishing capabiltiy
[22:44:11]<random> articles module should be enhanced
[22:44:35]<random> so here is a set of priorities that needs to be agreed 
upon
[22:44:43]<random> or so I see it :)
[22:46:04]<Tim1980> Yes, and more discussion is always great, but that is 
very different then taking no action or saying there is no need for a 
change.
[22:48:43]<chris> I'm saying that there isn't a need for a change right now 
with ref to first party modules. I Just don't think it's in the projects 
interests to adopt more responsibility at this time
[22:49:28]<Tim1980> Also note first party modules doesn2019t mean 
developers can2019t make their own version of modules, it would just mean, 
at least in the most basic of terms. They project will maintain these 
modules. It doesn2019t even have to mean you will enhance them. Maybe once 
more people are involved someone could be tasked to maintaining and 
enhancing first party modules. It2019s not for me to decide which modules 
are first party and which remain un
[22:50:56]<Tim1980> What extra responsibility? Unless you2019re telling me 
you plan to not upgrade registration to work with 2.1.0. You have already 
taken the responsibility to upgrade it to the next release.
[22:51:03]<random> why is it not for you to decide?
[22:51:24]<Tim1980> I am not on the PMC or the development team
[22:51:50]<random> seems to me input is useful no matter where it comes from
[22:52:01]<chris> tim, the same can be said of nearly every module in the 
jamaica repo's right now
[22:52:05]<random> hence my interest in having a discussion
[22:52:31]<random> which, if I'm not mistaken,
[22:52:41]<random> you are interpreting as a delaying tactic :)
[22:53:14]<chris> they're all going to be upgraded for 2.1.0, and most of 
that work will be done by project developers, that doesn't mean we have a 
responsibility to update them though
[22:56:15]<random> guys, this is an interesting and important topic,but I 
need to head out
[22:56:36]<chris> understand here, I'm not against the idea, just that a) 
we're light on resources as it is, without committing to more undertake more 
work and b) targeting the modules really needs a thorough discussion
[22:57:01]<chris> ah, so do I, been putting it off for the last hour
[22:57:13]<Tim1980> Okay enjo thanks for the meeting
[22:57:21]<chris> anyone any objections to carrying this topic over?
[22:57:32]<Tim1980> and Chris by your own statments A isn;t a real concern 
;)
[22:57:41]<random> happy to take it up again
[22:57:48]<Tim1980> If we want to talk about it at a furuture meeting thats 
great :)
[22:58:17]<Robert> +1 to carring over. Need to get dinner finished for 
mother deariest :P
[22:58:29]<random> there's a good son
[22:58:40]<chris> Tim, with my PMC hat on, a is a concern, with my dev hat 
on and an itch to scratch it isn't ;)
[22:59:50]<random> in the caseof registration module a useful exercise would 
be to map out the different types of registration processes of interest
[22:59:59]<Robert> Always a good son I am lucky to have my mother and I am 
not just saying that because its mothers day :P
[23:01:05]<Tim1980> Anyway I don't have anything else of intrest to add 
today :) I look forward to taking this subject up in a future meeting.
[23:01:20]<chris> cool, look forward to it :)
[23:01:49]<chris> ok, that brings this weeks meeting to an end, thanks to 
everyone for attending
[23:01:59]<chris> ##### Meeting Ends ##### 



--===============0905094653==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Xaraya_devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.xaraya.com/mailman/listinfo/xaraya_devel

--===============0905094653==--